<p>My “S” is a prospective freshman 2010. He and I are very concerned about AU’s recent policy change about on-campus housing availability for Junior/Senior Year with the introduction of a lottery and no guaranteed housing!</p>
<p>This is in addition to the “tripling” already ongoing with freshman.</p>
<p>I guess this is in part due to the recession and AU’s endowment returns. The only way they can make ends meet is by accepting more students and increase tuition!</p>
<p>At least @ GW - they have Mount Vernon campus to expand their housing!</p>
<p>I think you’re smart to look ahead and be concerned about the future.</p>
<p>While a housing shortage is a problem now, the reasons for it show positive trends for AU–more interested freshmen, more interested transfers, and better student retention. So they’re doing something right.</p>
<p>Two other things are important to note. First, AU has increased student housing over the past several years. With the addition of Nebraska Hall and (next year) Roper Hall and Clark Hall, AU has significantly more on-campus housing available than it did just a few years ago.</p>
<p>Second, the fact that they are reserving spots for only 400 upperclassmen (when there are over 2,000 upperclassmen) implies that most upperclassmen already choose to move off campus. This was my experience when I was at AU. Especially during senior year, students tend to move off campus.</p>
<p>If this were recession-related, I would expect fewer students would (a) enroll–because AU is relatively expensive–and (b) stay on campus–because (at least in my experience) off-campus housing can be cheaper than on-campus housing. As for endowment returns, I have no idea how AU’s endowment has fared of late–I haven’t seen any data–but I do know that their bond ratings were recently upgraded by Standard & Poor’s, which implies overall financial strength.</p>
<p>I think this is more about increasing demand for AU than anything else. And given that, I think AU deserves a hard look by anyone who’s interested in it.</p>
<p>When my son, who will be a sophmore next year, enrolled at AU, it was with the understanding that housing would be guaranteed for four years. It was an important factor for me, if not as important for him. Now that he has been at AU and in DC for a semester, the fact that housing is no longer guaranteed for upper classmen, is not the troublesome worry that I thought it would be.
DC and AU seem to have brought out the best in him. While always outgoing and willing to try new things, the frameworks of AU have increased his curiosity and DC has been there to challenge his increasing independence. I would be very surprised if he would want to stay on campus for four years.
I wouldn’t write off AU so quickly. The least important factor in choosing a school, imho, should be the housing situation. New dorms are being opened on campus and the tripling only lasts into the first month or so of school, though many students, such as my son, have decided to stay with his two roommates.</p>
<p>It all depends on what your student is looking for.</p>
<p>My S was completely turned off by the housing at GW. He though Thurston, home to a huge number of GW freshmen, was gross, with up to 6 or more students in a very , very small two room “suite”–absolutely no chance for privacy or a quiet night with friends. And since most students choose GW because of the intensely urban nature of the school, being shuttled out to a satellite campus in Mount Vernon just didn’t cut it.</p>
<p>He preferred the oasis-like campus at AU, right on embassy row. Upper year housing is not something he was necessarily counting on–he and some friends are already talking about getting an apartment together at the Berkshire apartments across from campus. He is also planning on at least a semester if not a full year abroad for his junior year, and his senior year is just too far in the future for him to contemplate just now.</p>
<p>But for each student it’s different. AU is right for some students, GW is right for others. Both are awesome buy very different schools.</p>
<p>There was an article in “The Examiner,” talking about how AU no longer requires the SAT or ACT for ED applicants.( A pilot program) There was an another newspaper article about AU received a huge number of ED applicants this year that they were going to accept. Quick way to make a buck and bringing down the quality of students. Making life hard for those who need housing especially in one of the most expensive neighborhoods in D.C. (:</p>
<p>Oh, this big SAT policy change is spelled out on their Early Decision page under admissions. This explains the huge number of ED applicants, with probable lower qualifications. I have to wonder what is really going on financially with the school??</p>
<p>There is a Washington Post article that says AU offered the ED applicants a choice of no SAT or ACT submissions this year to sweeten the deal and received over a 46% increase in ED applications to secure students??? Why? If the school is desirable, why resort to this and now have to limit housing???</p>
<p>You don’t have to “wonder” about any of this. You can read their strategic plan, and look at what has happened to their bond rating (the highest in the country for any private college or university, including the Ivies), or look at what percentage of endowment income goes into operating budget. All publicly available information.</p>
<p>By the way, as 'red unwittingly notes (which is not surprising, since he is a student), going optional on SATs/ACTs INCREASES selectivity, thereby INCREASING (rather than decreasing) qualifications of entering students. That has been true everywhere it has been tried, which is why the trend is in that direction.</p>
<p>“I guess this is in part due to the recession and AU’s endowment returns.”</p>
<p>Virtually no impact whatsoever. AU has never spent significantly from its endowment in its operating budget (which is why, unlike the Ivies - let me tell you about Princeton, where my older one is a graduate student - and the well-endowed LACs and others, they have been no layoffs, no cutting of courses, no increases in class size, and no changes in planned initiatives.) AU has used special fund drives for building projects.</p>
<p>GW and AU are so different that comparing them on the basis of dorms is kind of pointless. However I can say that my S attended GW for a year prior to transferring, and at that time (several years ago), no one wanted to live at the Mount Vernon campus. The commuting was a big pain, and the location undercut the purpose of selecting an urban school. As for the GW freshman dorms, they are great for the partiers, not so good for others. The ambulances came regularly from Thursday night through Sunday to carry away those who had overindulged. Bottom line, every school has its dorm plusses and minuses, but there are so many other important factors to take into account, I don’t believe housing should be a dealbreaker when a school is otherwise a great choice. </p>
<p>The AU communication did portray the housing situation as temporary, until more dorms are built, but that does take years, plus I have to wonder where they would put them. Maybe it’s time to replace one of the older dorms with a high rise.</p>
<p>I that this should come into your decision making process. If you believe this may be a problem it is something you should review when making that final decision.</p>
<p>Some people say that housing should not be a decision to make on why you go to that school…I agree somewhat. Last year my son was trying to make a decision on what school. It was one of the check points that should come into the process, if you have to commute or housing is expensive it added time and money. Something that you should be in the budget (a car or additional transportation and more expensive housing)</p>
<p>The decision came down to 2 schools. He loved them both equally and both had pros and cons that were different. The one did not guaranteed housing Junior / Senior year. Last Washington DC it was going to be even more expensive to live off campus than a normal college town. It was a factor that we looked out and increase the budget for the expense. A car was needed also, but he had one so that was a mood point. But for some that would be additional.</p>
<p>Most people say that they would move off campus anyway…that may be true but depending on location does American have enough good moderate housing surroundin the area. </p>
<p>My son was accepted at American but was not one of the final choices. I would look at this and I do think in this case you should look at due to the location and availability of the housing</p>
<p>The overcrowding may be more of an issue in my mind…overcrowding in the tiny rooms for Freshman. I would look at this. That may be more of a problem. Freshman had enough problems adjusting to their first year and the social piece is a big one. Lack of Facilities at a big factor in this case</p>
<p>My “S” and I know that housing is not a “major” factor in final college decisions, but it is a factor to be considered. He is accepted @ BC which houses 50% of their freshman @ Newton Campus where they have to shuttle to anf from main campus similar to GW’s mount Vernon campus.</p>
<p>My “D” is junior @ NC State and moved off campus to a rental house, but the “costs” in Raleigh are much better than DC. So, I agree that the housing lottery @ AU for junior/senior is probalby not a big deal.</p>
<p>This housing policy change was not even mentioned @ the preview day we attended. You know thet were aware of this impending change then - I’m just concerned about their overall plan and this is crisis management in action!</p>
<p>My son and his friends are estimating that sharing an apartment at the Berkshire complex will be less expensive than living on campus. In addition, they have been given to understand that AU is actually renting out a portion of the complex to house non-first years, and they they plan to check in to that possibility as well when they return to campus.</p>
<p>You shouldn’t continue to insult me in a callous manner. Why is AU only offering optional SATs to the rich, those who can afford ED? Not regular admissions? Everyone knows that optional SATs translates into: School is desperate for money like what happened to Goucher, Smith, Wake Forest etc…</p>
<p>boysx3
Be aware that the only apts at the Berkshires available to underclassmen will be those not used by juniors and seniors, not too many likely, if the Berks is part of the lottery.</p>
<p>Smith is desperate for money. Yeah, right. 68% of students are on need-based aid. Endowment is at $1.2 billion, for a student body of 2,600 students.</p>
<p>Tell me another egg cream story.</p>
<p>What the policy did was INCREASE the qualifications of accepted students, as selectivity was/is significantly racheted up.</p>